If you stand against humanity, decency, and mercy...
You stand against me.

And I can and will destroy you if I can.
This administration, and those who support it, are in opposition to everything I have ever held dear, and in opposition to everything that was ever humane or decent - should you announce your support, or even admiration for it, then I will consider you below the lowest level of Nazi SS death camp guard, and crush you, personally and professionally, in every damn way I can reach you.

You'd be well advised to run now.
You've already cost me the very fucking LIVES of some of those I care about, and there will *BE* no mercy, none whatever, and I am DONE talking.

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!-----------------------------------------
"Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry

Get a clue - hate me, T, Second, KPO, Wishy, Jo, SGG, and others all you want, but if Frem says what he said that should be a giant, almost deafening gong going off in your head. Wise the fuck up in other words.

But we know you won't because Pride.

==============================

Yep. Trump must be pretty bad if he turns Frem into everything that Frem hates, which is what this post seems to indicate.

Quote:Get a clue - hate me, T, Second, KPO, Wishy, Jo, SGG, and others all you want, but if Frem says what he said that should be a giant, almost deafening gong going off in your head. Wise the fuck up in other words. - GSTRING

It's been in my mind what people like KWICKO and FREM would think .... people who I generally respect and on whose side I STILL usually fall.

DELETED BECAUSE OF FREMS'S THREAT.

*****

SO, FOR THE RECORD:

FREM, we still agree on many things. I'm totally against the Republican approach to the environment, health care, taxes, "trickle down", and a host of other issues on which we will find ourselves on the same side. I'm extremely angry at people like Paul Ryan, who seem determined to yank the rug out from under people who're just getting by, out of sheer smug maliciousness. In at least half of the cases, I'm also against the Dem approach as well. However, I view those as the purview of CONGRESS because they all take enacted law to make policy.

As far as the Presidency is concerned, DELETED BECAUSE OF FREM'S THREAT

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

I thought this post by Mike Rowe was perfect. The relevant part of this article goes like this ...

Quote: But if you’re trying to get me fired simply because you don’t like my worldview, well then, I’m going to fight back. Partly because I like my job, and partly because you’re wrong about your assumptions, but mostly because your tactics typify a toxic blend of laziness and group-think that are all too common today – a hot mess of hashtags and intolerance that deepen the chasm currently dividing our country.

Re-read your own post, and think about your actual position. You’ve publicly asked a network to fire the narrator of a hit show because you might not share his personal beliefs. Don’t you think that’s kind of…extraordinary? Not only are you unwilling to engage with someone you disagree with – you can’t even enjoy a show you claim to love if you suspect the narrator might not share your view of the world! Do you know how insular that makes you sound? How fragile?

I just visited your page, and read your own description of you. It was revealing. It says, “I stand my ground. I fear no one & nothing. I have & will fight for what’s right.”

Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t think the ground you’re standing on is worth defending. If you truly fear “no one & nothing,” it’s not because you’re brave; it’s because you’re unwilling to expose yourself to ideas that frighten you. And while I can see that you like to fight for what you think is “right” (in this case, getting people fired that you disagree with,) one could easily say the same thing about any other misguided, garden-variety bully.

*****

TV host Mike Rowe is known for his measured, devastating take-downs of people who attack him or his work. He has perfected the art of subtly twisting the knife in the side of critics with calm, cool language.

This skill was on display Thursday when Rowe responded to a woman criticized his politics on Facebook.

Rowe narrates the show “How The Universe Works” on the Science Channel. The woman, Rebecca Bright, called Rowe an “anti-education, science doubting, ultra-right wing conservative” who should be fired.

“I love the show How the Universe Works, but I’m lost on how the producers and the Science Channel can allow anti-education, science doubting, ultra-right wing conservative Mike Rowe to narrate the show,” Bright wrote, according to Rowe. “There are countless scientists that should be hired for that, or actors, if you must, that believe in education and science that would sound great narrating the show, example: Morgan Freeman. Cancel this fools contract and get any of your scientists so often on the show to narrate it.”

In his response, Rowe started off by exhibiting his knowledge of the subject of the show and killing Rebecca with kindness:

Well hi there, Rebecca. How’s it going?

First of all, I’m glad you like the show. “How the Universe Works” is a terrific documentary series that I’ve had the pleasure of narrating for the last six seasons. I thought this week’s premiere was especially good. It was called, “Are Black Holes Real?” If you didn’t see it, spoiler alert….no one knows!!!

It’s true. The existence of Black Holes has never been proven. Some cosmologists are now convinced they don’t exist at all, and the race to prove their actuality has become pretty intense. Why? Because so much of what we think we know about the cosmos depends upon them. In other words, the most popular explanations as to how the universe actually works, are based upon the existence of a thing that no one has been able to prove.

As I’m sure you know, it’s OK to make assumptions based on theories. In fact, it’s critical to progress. But it’s easy these days to confuse theory with fact. Thanks to countless movies and television shows that feature Black Holes as a plot device, and many documentaries that bring them to life with gorgeous CGI effects and dramatic music, a lot of people are under the assumption that Black Holes are every bit as real as the Sun and the Moon. Well, maybe they are, and maybe they aren’t. We just don’t know. That’s why I enjoyed this week’s show so much. It acknowledged the reasons we should question the existence of something that many assume to be “settled science.” It invited us to doubt.

Oftentimes, on programs like these, I’m asked to re-record a passage that’s suddenly rendered inaccurate by the advent of new information. Sometimes, over the course of just a few days. That’s how fast the information changes. Last year for instance, on an episode called “Galaxies,” the original script – carefully vetted by the best minds in physics – claimed there were approximately one hundred billion galaxies in the known universe. A hundred billion! (Not a typo.) I couldn’t believe it when I read it. I mean, the Milky Way alone has something like 400 billion stars! Andromeda has a trillion! How many stars must there be in a universe, with a hundred billion galaxies? Mind-boggling, right?

Well, a few weeks later, the best minds in physics came together again, and determined that the total number of galaxies in the universe was NOT in fact, a hundred billion. They were off. Not by a few thousand, or a few million, or few billion, or even a few hundred billion. The were off by two trillion. That’s right…TWO TRILLION!!

But here’s the point, Rebecca – when I narrate this program, it doesn’t matter if I’m correct or incorrect – I always sound the same. And guess what? So do the experts.

Rowe then slowly turned his keyboard to Rebecca’s idea that he should be fired because doesn’t “believe in education and science,” and it gets brutal:

When I wrote about this discrepancy, people became upset. They thought I was making fun of science. They thought I was suggesting that because physicists were off by one trillion, nine hundred billion galaxies, all science was suddenly suspect, and no claims could be trusted. In general, people like you accused me of “doubting science.” Which is a curious accusation, since science without doubt isn’t science at all.

This is an important point. If I said I was skeptical that a supernatural being put us here on Earth, you’d be justified in calling me a “doubter of religion.” But if I said I was skeptical that manmade global warming was going to melt the icecaps, that doesn’t make me a “doubter of science.”

Once upon a time, the best minds in science told us the Sun revolved around the Earth. They also told us the Earth was flat, and that a really bad fever could be cured by blood-letting. Happily, those beliefs were questioned by skeptical minds, and we moved forward. Science is a wonderful thing, and a critical thing. But without doubt, science doesn’t advance. Without skepticism, we have no reason to challenge the status quo. Anyway, enough pontificating. Let’s consider for a moment, your very best efforts to have me fired.

You’ve called me an “ultra-right wing conservative,” who is both “anti-education,” and “science-doubting.” Interestingly, you offer no proof. Odd, for a lover of science. So I challenge you to do so now. Please provide some evidence that I am in fact the person you’ve described. And by evidence, I don’t mean a sentence taken out of context, or a meme that appeared in your newsfeed, or a photo of me standing next to a politician or a talk-show host you don’t like. I mean actual proof of what you claim I am.

Also, please bear in mind that questioning the cost of a college degree does not make me “anti-education.” Questioning the existence of dark-matter does not make me a “dark-matter denier.” And questioning the wisdom of a universal $15 minimum wage doesn’t make me an “ultra-right wing conservative.” As for Morgan Freeman, I agree. He’s a terrific narrator, and a worthy replacement. But remember, Morgan played God on the big screen. Twice. Moreover, he has publicly claimed to be a “believer.” (gasp!) Should this disqualify him from narrating a series that contradicts the Bible at every turn? If not, why not?

Anyway, Rebecca, my beef with your post comes down to this – if you go to my boss and ask her to fire me because you can’t stand the sound of my voice, I get it. Narrators with unpleasant voices should probably look for other work anyway, and if enough people share your view, no hard feelings – I’ll make room for Morgan.

But if you’re trying to get me fired simply because you don’t like my worldview, well then, I’m going to fight back. Partly because I like my job, and partly because you’re wrong about your assumptions, but mostly because your tactics typify a toxic blend of laziness and group-think that are all too common today – a hot mess of hashtags and intolerance that deepen the chasm currently dividing our country.

Re-read your own post, and think about your actual position. You’ve publicly asked a network to fire the narrator of a hit show because you might not share his personal beliefs. Don’t you think that’s kind of…extraordinary? Not only are you unwilling to engage with someone you disagree with – you can’t even enjoy a show you claim to love if you suspect the narrator might not share your view of the world! Do you know how insular that makes you sound? How fragile?

I just visited your page, and read your own description of you. It was revealing. It says, “I stand my ground. I fear no one & nothing. I have & will fight for what’s right.”

Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t think the ground you’re standing on is worth defending. If you truly fear “no one & nothing,” it’s not because you’re brave; it’s because you’re unwilling to expose yourself to ideas that frighten you. And while I can see that you like to fight for what you think is “right” (in this case, getting people fired that you disagree with,) one could easily say the same thing about any other misguided, garden-variety bully.

In other words, Rebecca, I don’t think you give a damn about science. If I’m wrong, prove it. Take a step back and be skeptical about your own assumptions. Take a moment to doubt your own words, and ask yourself – as any good scientist would – if you’ve got your head up a black hole.

Having said all that, I think you’re gonna love next week’s episode. It’s called Multiple Stars! Check it out, Tuesdays at 10pm, on Science.

Best,
Mike

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

OH, AND BTW, for those of you who agree with FREM... HIS WAS A TERRORIST THREAT, and I'll be sure to notify the webmaster. And if you weren't so wrapped up in your self-righteousness, you would have recognized it for what it was.

Quote:Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
If you stand against humanity, decency, and mercy...
You stand against me.

And I can and will destroy you if I can.
This administration, and those who support it, are in opposition to everything I have ever held dear, and in opposition to everything that was ever humane or decent - should you announce your support, or even admiration for it, then I will consider you below the lowest level of Nazi SS death camp guard, and crush you, personally and professionally, in every damn way I can reach you.

You'd be well advised to run now.
You've already cost me the very fucking LIVES of some of those I care about, and there will *BE* no mercy, none whatever, and I am DONE talking.

-Frem
I do not serve The Blind God

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!-----------------------------------------
"Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry

Oh gawd...she's gonna talk us to death in an effort to justify her mental disorder.

It's funny that after a decade of Piratenews posting anti-Jewish propaganda that you think Haken -who is notorious for not getting involved- would care that you got smacked down for being the ignorant stooge you are.

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Re Mike Rowe:

The opposite of 'believer' isn't 'doubter', imo, because they both come from an immutable place unaffected by information. The believer believes and the doubter doubts, no matter what. The opposite of 'believer' is 'non-believer', or perhaps 'scientist'.

As for his position of 'doubt' about, say global warming, I'd probably give it more credit if he engaged in an exchange of information, rather than a theological debate about the holiness of being a 'doubter'.

THAT SAID, he's on point about people who like freedom and democracy until faced with the actuality of people who are free enough to not think the way they're SUPPOSED to think, and not vote the way they're SUPPOSED to vote. Then it's freedom and democracy trampled under the mad stomping of the crowd only willing to hear one voice, and respect one vote, and no other. So much for freedom. So much for democracy.

And though it's not part of the conversation, I find it remarkable that people here are willing to credit Eisenhower's warning about the military industrial complex, and completely fail to grasp the basic idea behind it - which is the existence of powerful groups with vested interests at work through the government. And despite the obvious recent history of a corrupt system that has lied to us directly and through the media, and which spies on us, and which has started wars of choice and toppled distant governments across the globe, the people here choose to believe its assertions made every day without evidence. And they refuse to call those assertions by their proper name, which is propaganda.

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!-----------------------------------------
"Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Also, at least Trump fucks grown women instead of girls.

Yes, we should ALLLL be so grateful that he enforces paying off all the people he sexually assaults.

Quote:It's funny that after a decade of Piratenews posting anti-Jewish propaganda that you think Haken -who is notorious for not getting involved- would care that you got smacked down for being the ignorant stooge you are.

PIRATE NEWS never threatened anyone as far as I know. And there's not a hair's breadth difference between "criticize Trump or I'll destroy you" or "believe in Allah or I'll destroy you".

If you can' see that, you're just a sick twisted fuck.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Yes, I agree with you KIKI ... science doesn't mean "immutable doubt". There is SOME level of evidence at which scientists say ... "OK, good enough until better evidence comes along".

Also, to be nitpicky about the whole "scientific theory" thing, Mike Rowe refers to "proof". In reality, you can never "prove" a hypothesis, you can only DISprove one.

For example, there might be a hypothesis out there about how much hard radiation human beings can withstand. They might have evidence gleaned from the nuclear bombs that we set off over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and exposures from nuclear reactor and laboratory accidents. They might even have an elegant calculation for the "repairability" of human DNA ... how many double-stranded breaks can be induced before repair mechanisms are overwhelmed. But in order to PROVE this theory, they'd had to test every single human being with hard radiation ... and even then, that doesn't test the realm of all possibilities.

Which all seems theoretical until you read about the case of the human cockroach, who was exposed to something like 1000X the amount of radiation that "should" kill a human being. I'm not sure if they ever figured out how this guy was so different, but he survived.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:
OH, AND BTW, for those of you who agree with FREM... HIS WAS A TERRORIST THREAT, and I'll be sure to notify the webmaster. And if you weren't so wrapped up in your self-righteousness, you would have recognized it for what it was.

Quote:Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
If you stand against humanity, decency, and mercy...
You stand against me.

And I can and will destroy you if I can.
This administration, and those who support it, are in opposition to everything I have ever held dear, and in opposition to everything that was ever humane or decent - should you announce your support, or even admiration for it, then I will consider you below the lowest level of Nazi SS death camp guard, and crush you, personally and professionally, in every damn way I can reach you.

You'd be well advised to run now.
You've already cost me the very fucking LIVES of some of those I care about, and there will *BE* no mercy, none whatever, and I am DONE talking.

-Frem
I do not serve The Blind God

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

I don't know about terrorism. I don't want to throw that word around any lighter than Frem chose to throw the word Nazi around here. I'm not entirely convinced that this was actually Frem that posted this. If it is, I feel sorry for him because something really terrible has just happened in his life and he's lashing out about it in a way that I've never seen him do before.

THAT is something else that everybody should think about as well. Especially the big cheering section started by Wishy here.

No. I wouldn't call it terrorism, but it is scary. Unlike any bullshit that Second posts about his "hero" fantasies about killing people and hiding the bodies, I don't take anything that Frem says lightly. I know about some stuff Frem has been able to do in the name of Good in the past that was unbelievable. If something so terrible has happened to him that he's on a mission now to hurt anybody that he feels is partially responsible for it, I do not want to be on that shitlist, and I do advise anybody here not to poke at the hornets nest.

Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki:
I've been wondering the same thing. It sounds like you're saying: don't disagree with Frem because his threats are credible.

That's a good summation.

I've got a lot of respect for Frem, and what he's capable of. I don't really take much that anybody in real life says when it comes to threatening behavior, let alone online. But I'm going to personally handle this situation as I would a handgun. Even if I know it's not loaded I'm going to treat it as if it were.

I'm not going to change the way I post about anything, because if that really is Frem, I think he knows me well enough that I'm not on anybody's side. All I'm saying to anybody here is to not confront him directly right now. If he really posted something like that, then something rocked his fucking world, and he puts the blame directly on Trump. A post like this is completely out of character from him and sounds more like something Reaverfan would have posted.

Reaverfan was an antifa pussy. Frem is a scary motherfucker if you're in his crosshairs.

Do as you will, but I'm giving him a wide berth until I know what the hell is going on.

Quote: If you stand against humanity, decency, and mercy...
You stand against me.

And I ... will destroy you if I can.

So much for humanity, decency, and mercy!

And lookit that, FREM: You manage to be a righteous violent prig while pretending to be otherwise. You DO serve the blind god!

Get a clue - hate me, T, Second, KPO, Wishy, Jo, SGG, and others all you want, but if Frem says what he said that should be a giant, almost deafening gong going off in your head. Wise the fuck up in other words.

But we know you won't because Pride.

==============================

Not pride per say G. Troll says it best. Sig's a troll. Harmony, truth, respect for others is not her thing. Just as it's not racist Trumps.

I would welcome FREM as another ally against those who troll in these threads. Let us hope he stays true to his word. Go get her FREM. While you're at it, give Jack and 1kiki a look.

Quote:Originally posted by Wishimay:
Oh gawd...she's gonna talk us to death in an effort to justify her mental disorder.

It's funny that after a decade of Piratenews posting anti-Jewish propaganda that you think Haken -who is notorious for not getting involved- would care that you got smacked down for being the ignorant stooge you are.

Seriously, SHUUUT UUUP.

I don't see it. Where's the like button. Why is there no like button. Poster sighs in frustration.

Yes, but they aren't the ONLY partners. Because "science" isn't stuck on being permanently skeptical about explanations for which there is already ample evidence. You don't see scientists going around still wondering if the earth is flat, do you? Or if the planets rotate around the sun?

People make the scientific method sound cut-and-dried, but there is a step in science which is like lightening in a bottle, and it's inspiration. That is the point at which you see what OTHERS have seen, but suddenly you see it in a new way because an idea comes to you that ties all of these observations together ... When Darwin saw the variety of finches and the idea of natural selection came to him, or when William Smith (a surveyor) noticed repeatable patterns of layers of rock (along with their embedded fossils) and came up with the idea that rocks were laid down in layers across large expanses of the country, and also came up with the idea of the Principle of Faunal Succession (a precursor to the theory of evolution). Alfred Wegener proposed that Africa and South America at one time were joined and subsequently drifted apart. When necropsying apes, marine biologist Alister Hardy noted the aquatic-adapted features of humans and proposed an aquatic (seashore) portion of our evolution as the key difference between us and other hominids.

Evidence is all around us. Uncounted millions of people have trod the same landscape, idly listened to the same chirping birds, looked at the same globe ... and at each other ... and never noticed the unifying process which tied the observations together.

Usually the questions come up AFTER an answer has been proposed. IF the answer survives the "shoot rocks at it" stage, it is accepted until other, better, more compelling evidence comes along.

I've asked for some of the compelling evidence on global climate change, and RAPPY has brought some interesting points to the board. I don't want to recapitulate the entire discussion here, but while most of the arguments can be easily explained away, there is one that still requires a little hand-waving to dismiss, and I don't think that the entire answer has been uncovered yet.

Point being, with enough evidence, scientific theories are accepted until better evidence comes along. Mike Rowe doesn't seem to want to accept that the theory of global warming has been accepted already; he assumes that science is stuck in a permanent state of doubt on that issue. It's not. Scientists may be WRONG, but there is very little doubt on that end; and until real EVIDENCE comes along which DISPROVES the theory of human-forced global warming, that is the prevailing hypothesis.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Quote:For the record: You set the f*cking gold standard for that - or don't you remember?

For the record, I said that IF YOU CONTINUE TO LIBEL ME and I FIND OUT WHO YOU ARE I WILL COME AFTER YOU IN COURT. Remember? I'm talking about LEGAL proceedings. Surely the thought of being taken to court isn't THAT scary, is it? Seems to me that you have enough lawyers and enough money to be well-insulated from all the inconvenience. And what am I asking you to do? To stop LIBELING me. And what is LIBEL? Well, it is spreading damaging LIES about someone. So, all YOU have to do is .... wait for it ... stop LYING about me, and all will be copacetic.

Now, I know lying comes to you as naturally as breathing (you just did it!) and it may be difficult for you to stop, but in reality its a reasonable expectation .... not to lie about people online... and so ultimately the boundaries on your behavior should be pretty clear: STOP LYING and you'll be OK!

****

But, if I had said that I would hunt you down and destroy you because you've offended me in some unspecified manner; crush you personally and professionally in every way that I could reach you ... and I had a history of being able to do just that ... that would be a different story, wouldn't it?

None of you should be egging on this kind of threat, and if you are then you're just as sick and twisted as the people that you claim to be against. A giant GONG should be going off in YOUR head as to what you advocate and what you've become. Because you've become that abusive person who beats up on someone because you feel frustrated and had a bad day/week/year. There is nothing merciful, humane, or good in it.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:Originally posted by G:

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:

People who uncork their violent tendencies and THREATEN people, unprovoked, are unhinged.

For the record: You set the f*cking gold standard for that - or don't you remember?

For the record, I said that IF YOU CONTINUE TO LIBEL ME and I FIND OUT WHO YOU ARE I WILL COME AFTER YOU IN COURT. Remember? I'm talking about LEGAL proceedings. Surely the thought of being taken to court isn't THAT scary, is it? Seems to me that you have enough lawyers and enough money to be well-insulated from all the inconvenience. And what am I asking you to do? To stop LIBELING me. And what is LIBEL? Well, it is spreading damaging LIES about someone. So, all YOU have to do is .... wait for it ... stop LYING about me, and all will be copacetic.

Signym, you are using a pseudonym. A pseudo-person can't actually be libeled because they don't exist. But if you did hire a lawyer to sue, despite there being no chance of winning, the court would require you to give your real name when your lawyer files the case.

People who uncork their violent tendencies and THREATEN people, unprovoked, are unhinged.

For the record: You set the f*cking gold standard for that - or don't you remember?

For the record, I said that IF YOU CONTINUE TO LIBEL ME and I FIND OUT WHO YOU ARE I WILL COME AFTER YOU IN COURT. Remember? I'm talking about LEGAL proceedings. Surely the thought of being taken to court isn't THAT scary, is it? Seems to me that you have enough lawyers and enough money to be well-insulated from all the inconvenience. And what am I asking you to do? To stop LIBELING me. And what is LIBEL? Well, it is spreading damaging LIES about someone. So, all YOU have to do is .... wait for it ... stop LYING about me, and all will be copacetic.

Signym, you are using a pseudonym. A pseudo-person can't actually be libeled because they don't exist. But if you did hire a lawyer to sue, despite there being no chance of winning, the court would require you to give your real name when your lawyer files the case.

These are the type of people we're dealing with here. T has advocated for everybody on the board to HATE us, and is encouraging somebody to Dox us because he doesn't like us. Second talks about how he wants to murder people and hide the body and suggests that rather than go to court you should just find out who they are and send the swat team to their house in hopes they actually die. Wishy stands by the sidelines with her pitchfork and torch and cheerleads the whole process.

These are not reasonable people. They might have been at one point, but this world has driven them mad.

This isn't even fun anymore. I think it might be time to take a break for a while until things cool down. SGG coming in sometimes and ranting and swearing up a storm is one thing, but you people are out for blood.

You're sick. You need to take a real good look in the mirror and see what you're turning into and how much it mirrors what you think you're standing up against.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Yeah. Good advice.

These are the type of people we're dealing with here. T has advocated for everybody on the board to HATE us, and is encouraging somebody to Dox us because he doesn't like us. Second talks about how he wants to murder people and hide the body and suggests that rather than go to court you should just find out who they are and send the swat team to their house in hopes they actually die. Wishy stands by the sidelines with her pitchfork and torch and cheerleads the whole process.

These are not reasonable people. They might have been at one point, but this world has driven them mad.

This isn't even fun anymore. I think it might be time to take a break for a while until things cool down. SGG coming in sometimes and ranting and swearing up a storm is one thing, but you people are out for blood.

You're sick. You need to take a real good look in the mirror and see what you're turning into and how much it mirrors what you think you're standing up against.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Just for reference, since Signym is talking about suing for libel:
"Why Donald Trump Has Never Won a Libel Case"

Perfect example of Trump's frivolous ways: suing HBO comedian-host Bill Maher “for suckering Trump into sending his birth certificate to prove he was not the 'spawn' of an orangutan.” Trump filed a $5-million breach-of-contract lawsuit since Maher said he'd donate $5 million to charity if Trump could prove it, only to then withdraw the suit after it was quickly ridiculed.
www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/10/donald-trump-has-never-won-a-libel-case

Thank you, SIX, for that summary. I'm not going to post on this topic any more, I think my POV should be clear by now. The only ethical reason for violence is to defend someone from violence. If you blur that standard. then you wind up being what you say you're against; and you've lost whatever moral high ground you thought you had.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Thank you, SIX, for that summary. I'm not going to post on this topic any more, I think my POV should be clear by now. The only ethical reason for violence is to defend someone from violence. If you blur that standard. then you wind up being what you say you're against; and you've lost whatever moral high ground you thought you had.

The Civil War had to be fought because the question of slavery could not be decided politely in a debate between two philosophers sitting beneath a Magnolia tree drinking mint juleps. It had to be violently decided without your prissy little "The only ethical reason for violence is to defend someone from violence." One side had thousands of years of history, plus the bible, plus their own economic interests supporting slavery. And the other side had nothing, at least in the opinion of every slave owner and those people who had aspirations to one day own a slave so that the new owner would not have to work so hard.

Quote:For the record: You set the f*cking gold standard for that - or don't you remember?

For the record, I said that IF YOU CONTINUE TO LIBEL ME and I FIND OUT WHO YOU ARE I WILL COME AFTER YOU IN COURT. Remember? I'm talking about LEGAL proceedings. Surely the thought of being taken to court isn't THAT scary, is it? Seems to me that you have enough lawyers and enough money to be well-insulated from all the inconvenience. And what am I asking you to do? To stop LIBELING me. And what is LIBEL? Well, it is spreading damaging LIES about someone. So, all YOU have to do is .... wait for it ... stop LYING about me, and all will be copacetic.

Now, I know lying comes to you as naturally as breathing (you just did it!) and it may be difficult for you to stop, but in reality its a reasonable expectation .... not to lie about people online... and so ultimately the boundaries on your behavior should be pretty clear: STOP LYING and you'll be OK!

****

But, if I had said that I would hunt you down and destroy you because you've offended me in some unspecified manner; crush you personally and professionally in every way that I could reach you ... and I had a history of being able to do just that ... that would be a different story, wouldn't it?

None of you should be egging on this kind of threat, and if you are then you're just as sick and twisted as the people that you claim to be against. A giant GONG should be going off in YOUR head as to what you advocate and what you've become. Because you've become that abusive person who beats up on someone because you feel frustrated and had a bad day/week/year. There is nothing merciful, humane, or good in it.

I wonder if he would have made more sense by saying he will destroy you, for your own good, because he loves you. You know, being decent, humane, merciful and all.

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:your prissy little "The only ethical reason for violence is to defend someone from violence."

For the record, the south started the Civil War with a military attack on a northern fort - Fort Sumpter. Without that ill-fated attack, there might not have been a war. You don't seem to know your history.

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:your prissy little "The only ethical reason for violence is to defend someone from violence."

For the record, the south started the Civil War with a military attack on a northern fort - Fort Sumpter. Without that ill-fated attack, there might not have been a war. You don't seem to know your history.

You spelled Fort Sumpter. It's Sumter and the battle was in April 1861. But months before that was the "ill-fated" notion that a state had the right to nullify federal laws and, even, secede from the United States. A convention summoned unanimously voted to secede on December 20, 1860, and adopted the "Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union".

It argued for states' rights for slave owners in the South, but contained a complaint about states' rights in the North in the form of opposition to the Fugitive Slave Act, claiming that Northern states were not fulfilling their federal obligations under the Constitution to return living property that had run away to the North on two legs. I can see how this philosophical disagreement about slaves not being human could end with somebody being shot dead in anger.

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Thank you, SIX, for that summary. I'm not going to post on this topic any more, I think my POV should be clear by now. The only ethical reason for violence is to defend someone from violence. If you blur that standard. then you wind up being what you say you're against; and you've lost whatever moral high ground you thought you had.

I'm guess things people talk of are new alt conservative media, a new grassroot nationalist far-right movement? the a mix of Libertarianism and Patriotism...Frog memes, the Twitter Gab Facebook websites steemit minds and sound cloud social networks, USA European Identitarianism, a mix of others and merger of traditional white nationalists...an alt right group or the Alt-Right for a better term...

the 'Sh-thole' remark ?

Did President Donaldn Trump say this or was it he said, hearsay then she said...stuff

maybe he did say...he does shoot his mouth and he is not politically correct

However I think he wanted a bunch of people to sign some illegal immigration bill did he not? Immigration Negotiations with Congress and Senate? A Deep State Neo-Con Neo-Liberal guy like Lindsey Graham comes along, he wants a whole bunch of stuff signed off, cronyism politics, ear marks, build he new Local political Store, Park, Casino and New Fed funded Local Shopping Mall for his Local voters...allow in a bunch of his friend from Saudi or some place and maybe Lindsey Graham will finally put his signature on that paper...Earmarks and "pork barrel" Legislation.

maybe Trump then told Lindsey to go F--K Off in more polite terms
Lindsey and their types then throw a hissy fit and run to the media with their stories

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
No BS, just lay the cards on the table to let people know where you stand.

Media Circus

Over the Edge

The mainstream media is in a uproar after President Donald Trump allegedly referred to “s**thole” countries during an immigration related policy discussion.

Stefan Molyneux looks at history of competing scientific theories, the differences between Haiti and the Dominican Republic, and the importance of looking at the science of Intelligence disparities to have an informed discussion.

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Very simple and straightforward, to the point. I appreciate it when someone makes their point and stands firm. No BS, just lay the cards on the table to let people know where you stand.

And that's it. Nothing more to be said.

SGG

I was really hoping for you to be the voice of reason when and if you finally chimed in.

THUGR, G, WISHY, SECOND, and SGG have become collectively unhinged. Not too long ago, they were gasping is dismay when Obama's picture appeared in crosshairs. Now, they see nothing wrong with doing the same thing to Trump.

And here's the problem: Both sides are dolts. By allowing themselves to be pitted against each other over stupid things, when they're being butt-fucked by the third party who is stirring them up in some kind of Jerry Springer cage-match... well, what can I say? They all mutually deserve what they get.

Guys, one more appeal to reason: like it or not, WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER. We either find a way forward together, or we sink into the swamp together.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Quote:Originally posted by G:
And it's helping the Republicans destroy themselves and acts as a Warning for the Dems of what not to become (hopefully they're smart enough to recognize).

I would hope that the message they're learning is to get their shit together so they're not the party that has a chance to lose against another Trump.

Sure, there are a LOT of Republican voters that will never change their vote, just as their are Democratic voters that will never change theirs either.

It was the middle that voted for Trump over Hillary that put him in the office. Those of us who voted against the Democrats that aren't Republican were simply choosing what we felt the lesser of two evils were.

If they're not learning the real lesson to be learned here, then I have no buyer's remorse.

You've got 3 years to fix this shit. Talk to T. As I just stated earlier this morning, he seems to be the only Democrat here that knows what the problems with his party are.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

For the record:

An astonishing 91 times, Trump has celebrated a rise in the stock market — even though in the campaign he repeatedly said it was a “bubble” that was ready to crash as soon as the Federal Reserve started raising interest rates. Well, the Fed has raised rates four times since the election — and yet the stock market has not plunged as Trump predicted. It has continued a rise in stock prices that began under President Barack Obama in 2009. Again, Trump has never explained his shift in position on the stock market, making his consistent cheerleading misleading.

Moreover, the U.S. stock market rise in 2017 was not unique and mirrored a global rise in equities. http://wapo.st/2DhQvYx

When looking at the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index, it’s clear U.S. stocks haven’t rallied as robustly as their foreign equivalents. The percentage gain in the S&P 500 during Obama’s first year still tops Trump’s numbers — though any president bragging about stock market performance soon finds out it’s a fool’s game.

In a Parliamentary system, the Democrats would be a minority (collision? coalition!) of a bunch of little parties with slightly incompatible beliefs. There is no fix for that. The Democrats will always lose, except when the GOP does something stupendously incompetent. Think of Herbert Hoover not responding to the Great Depression. We don't have the hindsight of history with Trump that we do with Hoover, but for the record, Trump gives the strong impression of being incompetent.

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

SECOND

The problem isn't that democrats don't know how to come together as a party. Because a mere 8 years ago - at the start of Obama's first term - democrats had Congress AND the presidency.
senate
house

And from 1960 through 1990, the majority of governors were democratic, with the exception of 3 years. And democrats had control of Congress and the White House during Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton's first 2 years.

Once again - you're wrong. This isn't about because ... democrats.

Democrats as democrats have done well in the past. So, what are democrats doing wrong now?

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:Originally posted by G:
I didn't include this quote because it would make me look ... wrong. "This administration, and those who support it, are in opposition to everything I have ever held dear, and in opposition to everything that was ever humane or decent - should you announce your support, or even admiration for it ..."

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

Quote: No there isn't - do you see a name? Unless they "... stand against humanity, decency, and mercy... " they have nothing to worry about. Or were you thinking SIGNYM fits that description?- GSTRING

No, but I think YOU do.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

In a Parliamentary system, the Democrats would be a minority (collision? coalition!) of a bunch of little parties with slightly incompatible beliefs. There is no fix for that. The Democrats will always lose, except when the GOP does something stupendously incompetent. Think of Herbert Hoover not responding to the Great Depression. We don't have the hindsight of history with Trump that we do with Hoover, but for the record, Trump gives the strong impression of being incompetent.

What are you talking about? Are you so delusional that you believe that the GOP is a Borg-like hive-mind?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki:
SECOND

The problem isn't that democrats don't know how to come together as a party. Because a mere 8 years ago - at the start of Obama's first term - democrats had Congress AND the presidency.
senate
house

And from 1960 through 1990, the majority of governors were democratic, with the exception of 3 years. And democrats had control of Congress and the White House during Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton's first 2 years.

Once again - you're wrong. This isn't about because ... democrats.

Democrats as democrats have done well in the past. So, what are democrats doing wrong now?

The Democrats don't stick together. In today's Houston Chronicle there was an article about the two MLK Jr parades that marched simultaneously a couple of miles apart. After 21 years, the Democratic mayor says that next year, if he can get the city council to agree, there will be only one permit issued for one parade, not two. The mayor said something about a house divided against itself cannot stand. That is the Democratic Party. Even when everyone in the party more or less agrees, the party still falls apart. The party has hopelessly stupid internal disagreements.
www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Turner-calls-for-one-MLK-Parade-in-2019-12500046.php

The stupidity of Democrats shows in bigger questions than two parades or one. The FISA got reauthorized because, I'll just quote:

Quote:Democrats have been all over the airwaves recently accusing Donald Trump of abusing the Justice Department to go after his political enemies —most notably his former opponent Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation, which the Department of Justice is reportedly currently investigating based on allegation made during the 2016 presidential campaign. So you’d think they would oppose handing Donald Trump any more power with which he could potentially use against all sorts of Americans who attract negative attention from his administration.

Yet, with the help of some Democrats, the House of Representatives voted today — and the Senate will do so sometime in the next week — to extend a controversial NSA surveillance power that potentially affects millions of Americans’ privacy rights.

Well now you're just bringing up issues in the Democratic Party that I wasn't even aware of. I do agree that those need to be fixed as well.

I should state, however, that if you're sitting on the other side thinking that all people who vote Republican all believe the exact same thing, you're gravely mistaken. I think the issue here might simply be that Republican Politicians are either better at getting their message out to people that will vote, are better and manipulating people for votes, are better at working together for their own goals when they secure the votes, or any combination of those three.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Well now you're just bringing up issues in the Democratic Party that I wasn't even aware of. I do agree that those need to be fixed as well.

I should state, however, that if you're sitting on the other side thinking that all people who vote Republican all believe the exact same thing, you're gravely mistaken. I think the issue here might simply be that Republican Politicians are either better at getting their message out to people that will vote, are better and manipulating people for votes, are better at working together for their own goals when they secure the votes, or any combination of those three.

Very logical.

There is a great deal of plotting, planning, and thinking going on inside the head of a politician. GOP politicians concentrate their brains on a few goals; Democratic politicians get mentally distracted by too many mildly conflicting goals and intraparty feuding. The different styles of thinking show up in the different success rates at election time. If the GOP ever gets as scattered brained as the Democratic Party, the GOP will fall to the Democrats' success rate.

The real worry the GOP has is doing an incompetent job and the voters noticing. Losing the Iraq War was one of those moments of peak incompetence. Crashing the economy in 2008 was another. But the GOP talked its way out of blame and was reelected after a two year cooling off period with the voters.

Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Well now you're just bringing up issues in the Democratic Party that I wasn't even aware of. I do agree that those need to be fixed as well.

I should state, however, that if you're sitting on the other side thinking that all people who vote Republican all believe the exact same thing, you're gravely mistaken. I think the issue here might simply be that Republican Politicians are either better at getting their message out to people that will vote, are better and manipulating people for votes, are better at working together for their own goals when they secure the votes, or any combination of those three.

Very logical.

There is a great deal of plotting, planning, and thinking going on inside the head of a politician. GOP politicians concentrate their brains on a few goals; Democratic politicians get mentally distracted by too many mildly conflicting goals and intraparty feuding. The different styles of thinking show up in the different success rates at election time. If the GOP ever gets as scattered brained as the Democratic Party, the GOP will fall to the Democrats' success rate.

The real worry the GOP has is doing an incompetent job and the voters noticing. Losing the Iraq War was one of those moments of peak incompetence. Crashing the economy in 2008 was another. But the GOP talked its way out of blame and was reelected after a two year cooling off period with the voters.

I agreed with you up until after the first sentence of the last paragraph.

The GOP's moment of peak incompetence wasn't losing the Iraq War. It was starting the Iraq War, or to be more specific, Congress not doing their fucking job their being paid for and allowing GWB to start the Iraq War.

Maybe in the mind of the sycophantic GOP voters, they were able to talk their way out of their incompetence that allowed the tanked economy in 2008, but I sure as hell didn't forget and I wouldn't throw such blanket statements around. In this case, Obama's "solutions" to the problem were to rob from our children and grandchildren to set the ship right today. Anybody intelligent enough to see that was voting against him. Even if it meant putting the idiot GOP back in control.

THIS is the biggest flaw in a two party system. At least for the proletariat.

If your fortunate enough to be PART of the two party system then everything is working as designed.

All FIREFLY graphics and photos on this page are copyright 2002-2012 Mutant Enemy, Inc., Universal Pictures, and 20th Century Fox.
All other graphics and texts are copyright of the contributors to this website.
This website IS NOT affiliated with the Official Firefly Site, Mutant Enemy, Inc., or 20th Century Fox.